In TheGlobe and Mail, Lawrence Martin argues that Justin Trudeau represents the “best hope for a Liberal Party revival.” This might well be true, depending on your definition of “revival.” “His entry in the race would set fire to Canadian politics,” says Martin. “It would, given Pierre Trudeau’s legacy, polarize the debate even more so than it is already polarized. It would scare New Democrats, especially given Mr. Trudeau’s Quebec base. It would vault the Liberal contest into prime time for a year to come.” Fair enough. But who is this guy? Considering that “we don’t know whether he has the discipline, the knowledge, the moxie to face down the mega-ton of malice that would come his way” — or, indeed, what he really stands for — much of the case for his leadership seems like the same old new-leader fetishism that has served the Liberals so very poorly in recent years. And as Martin says, the Conservatives would be licking their chops in anticipation.

“Too many Liberals are scouring the landscape for a saviour,” the Toronto Star’s Chantal Hébert writes. She means there are too many Trudeau fans — a recent poll shows him way out in front of Bob Rae — for his denials of interest to calm the chatter, but we suspect it’s true in another sense, too: Too many of them are looking for a saviour, as opposed to the best rebuilder. Hébert, for one, thinks Trudeau might be better off waiting for the next leader to guide the party towards an inevitable NDP merger, and then throwing his hat in that ring.

Speaking of Bob Rae, Steve Paikin, writing in the Ottawa Citizen, argues that he was something of a visionary in forcing employees to take unpaid days off work in tough economic times sooner than fire them. Now everyone from the state of California to The Globe and Mail is doing it! Thanks, Bob!

The National Post’s John Ivison notes that Liberal outrage at the Conservatives’ omnibus budget bill falls a bit flat, considering that for 13 years that party “had ample opportunity to bar the use of omnibus bills.” For that matter, “in the years of Conservative minority, the opposition parties could have banded together to limit budget bills to changes in spending but failed to do so.” And now, here we are. One hopes lessons have been learned, but one rather suspects not.

The Post’s Kelly McParland applauds Elizabeth May’s efforts to hold the government to account on “its Brobdingnagian budget bill,” and warns Conservatives that their inevitable “victory” in this matter may prove hollow. “It has become accepted wisdom that Conservative treatment of the legislative process is often high-handed and abusive, has contributed to public cynicism and borders on a threat to the democratic process itself.” Many conservative Canadians are quite rightly cheesed off, and for what?

Sun Media’s Ezra Levant predicts that “in 20 years time,” repealing Section 13 of the Human Rights Act “will be regarded as one of the Conservatives’ greatest legacies.” We wonder: Would that be Canada’s first great political legacy enacted via a private member’s bill?

Duly notedThe Montreal Gazette’s Henry Aubin argues that “the demonstrations that started as anti-tuition marches, then became anti-Bill 78 events and now anti-neo-liberalism ones, have inadvertently also become … in effect, anti-Montreal events.” They are keeping tourists and locals away from downtown, which (unlike so many cities) is the heart of it all. Shutting down educational institutions threatens the city’s “future prosperity,” which “depends on the knowledge economy,” and impacts the recruitment of international students. And the overall image of volatility and instability hurts the city’s push to host various international organizations. Enough, already.

Postmedia’s Andrew Coyne concedesDan Gardner’s point that Labatt may have had ample reason to fear that a photo of Luka Magnotta drinking a Blue would negatively impact the brand — though both of them quite rightly think Labatt should have been a lotsmarter than to make a big fuss about it. But it is not rational that human beings would behave that way, Coyne argues; we ought to be annoyed that we are so susceptible to advertisers’ (and politicians’) nonsense. Coyne thinks social media afford us an opportunity to “burst the totalitarian bubble.”

We could not possibly summarize Colby Cosh’s essay, at Macleans.ca, which considers artisanal chocolate and the nature of work in an ever-more-automated age. But it’s very, very interesting, and we suggest everyone read it when they have 15 minutes at hand.